The Role of Surprise in Hindsight Bias – A Metacognitive Model of Reduced and Reversed Hindsight Bias

Hindsight bias is the well researched phenomenon that people falsely believe that they would have correctly predicted the outcome of an event once it is known. In recent years, several authors have doubted the ubiquity of the effect and have reported a reversal under certain conditions. This article presents an integrative model on the role of surprise as one factor explaining the malleability of the hindsight bias. Three ways in which surprise influences the reconstruction of pre-outcome predictions are assumed: (1) Surprise is used as direct metacognitive heuristic to estimate the distance between outcome and prediction. (2) Surprise triggers a deliberate sense-making process, and (3) also biases this process by enhancing the retrieval of surprise-congruent information and expectancy-based hypothesis testing.

The role of surprise in hindsight bias : a metacognitive model of reduced and reversed hindsight bias

Hindsight bias is the well researched phenomenon that people falsely believe that they would have correctly predicted the outcome of an event once it is known. In recent years, several authors have doubted the ubiquity of the effect and have reported a reversal under certain conditions. This article presents an integrative model on the role of surprise as one factor explaining the malleability of the hindsight bias. Three ways in which surprise influences the reconstruction of pre-outcome predictions are assumed: (1) Surprise is used as direct metacognitive heuristic to estimate the distance between outcome and prediction. (2) Surprise triggers a deliberate sense-making process, and (3) also biases this process by enhancing the retrieval of surprise-congruent information and expectancy-based hypothesis testing

Failure as an asset for high-status persons - relative group performance and attributed occupational success

According to research on social identity theory and on prescriptive norms and stereotypes people are viewed as prototypical of a group to the extent that they possess ingroup characteristics but not outgroup characteristics. Following this assumption, even failure might have positive effects for high-status persons when they underperform in low-status domains. In this case, individual failure may be viewed as indicative of strong prototypicality for the high-status group and therefore lead to the attribution of future occupational success. Five experiments, using different high- and low-status groups, confirmed the hypothesis that people will attribute high occupational success to high-status persons who allegedly scored poorly on an achievement test in which a low-status group in general excelled relative to a high-status group. This effect was shown to be mediated by the attribution of prototypicality for the high-status group

When failing feels good - relative prototypicality for a high-status group can counteract ego-threat after individual failure

Two studies demonstrate that members of high-status groups (i.e., men and students of business administration) but not members of low-status groups (i.e., women and education students) react with an increase in state self-esteem after an alleged poor performance on a fictitious intelligence test. This Failure-as-an-Asset (FA) effect is only observed when the high-status ingroup (i.e., men) is outperformed by a low-status outgroup (i.e., women). In this case, a poor performance will lead to a strong identification with the ingroup due to high ingroup prototypicality. As predicted, the effects of experiencing success or failure on self-esteem were mediated by identification with the ingroup

Beyond procedure's content: Cognitive subjective experiences in procedural justice judgments

Procedural justice concerns play a critical role in economic settings, politics, and other domains of human life. Despite the vast evidence corroborating their relevance, considerably less is known about how procedural justice judgments are formed. Whereas earlier theorizing focused on the systematic integration of content information, the present contribution provides a new perspective on the formation of justice judgments by examining the influence of accessibility experiences. Specifically, we hypothesize that procedural justice judgments may be formed based on the ease or difficulty with which justice-relevant information comes to mind. Three experiments corroborate this prediction in that procedures were evaluated less positively when the retrieval of associated unfair aspects was easy compared to difficult. Presumably this is because when it feels easy (difficult) to retrieve unfair aspects, these are perceived as frequent (infrequent), and hence the procedure as unjust (just). In addition to demonstrating that ease-of-retrieval may influence justice judgments, the studies further revealed that reliance on accessibility experiences is high in conditions of personal certainty. We suggest that this is because personal uncertainty fosters systematic processing of content information, whereas personal certainty may invite less taxing judgmental strategies such as reliance on ease-of-retrieval

Shaping Cooperation Behavior: The Role of Accessibility Experiences

The present research investigates the influence on cooperative behavior of accessibility experiences associated with the retrieval of fairness-relevant information from memory. We argue that the decision whether to cooperate in negotiations depends not only on information about the appropriateness of the negotiation procedure, but also on the experience of how difficult or easy it is to come up with this information. Supporting this hypothesis, it is shown that in the context of a bargaining experiment, participants' experiences of ease or difficulty in retrieving unfair aspects of the respective negotiation procedure strongly influence their cooperation behavior. In addition, we hypothesize and empirically substantiate that the influence of accessibility experiences on cooperation behavior occurs particularly in situations of certainty salience. Implications for future research on cooperation and on accessibility experiences are discussed

The politics hurdle: Joint effect of organizational culture and gender on lack of fit experiences

We propose that an organizational culture where playing politics is important for advancement, compared with an organizational culture where showing competencies is important, elicits stronger lack of fit experiences for women than for men. In a pre- study, playing politics was perceived as dominant, typically male work behaviors, whereas showing competencies was perceived as competent, typically female work behaviors. We then tested in two experiments (689 individuals, integrated in a small-scale meta-analysis) the joint effect of organizational culture and gender on four lack of fit indicators (self-concept conflict, fear of backlash, intention to seek power positions, concerns about one’s skills). As expected, women indicated more lack of fit experi- ences than men in politics cultures, but not in competencies cultures. Our findings suggest that perceived organizational culture may play an important role in understanding the dynamics of career advancement of women and men